Too many planets

dmm · #1 February 2nd, 2001, 10:07 PM

quote:
Originally posted by apache:
I think the difference between the domed Versions of all the planets and non-domed is basically the life forms would need some sort of breathing apparatus to survive outside the dome, while in non-domed planets, they would need simply an environmental suit to protect them from the hostile environments. This would allow them to get around the planet much easier if they did not need to bring their air with them.

Yeah, that's the way I was thinking about it.

I think BB is being too restrictive saying that undomed colonies should be able to survive under stone-age conditions. How many modern urbanites would survive if Earth suddenly reverted to stone age conditions? And we're not very advanced compared to the spacefaring SEIV races.

However, I do very much agree with BB that, for example, rock races should always have a harder time colonizing gas and ice planets. I would like to see that idea (dare I say "reality"?) reflected in the rules, just not as restrictively as BB proposes.

Ideally, I would propose 4 classes of colonies:
4. total artificial environment (wrong atmos, wrong type)
3. partial artificial environment (right atmos, wrong type)
2. lightly domed (wrong atmos, right type)
1. unrestricted (right atmos, right type).

The max pop, facil, & storage would increase for each class. The ability to build the top two colony classes would be a racial trait. To compensate for making the game harder for peace-lovers, give players the ability to trade population with other players, or allow immigration, or allow research into genetically-altered populations.

Barnacle Bill · #2 February 3rd, 2001, 01:40 PM

quote:
Originally posted by dmm:
How many modern urbanites would survive if Earth suddenly reverted to stone age conditions? And we're not very advanced compared to the spacefaring SEIV races.

That is why I wrote "perhaps at lower population density due to food production". If technology on earth today suddenly dropped to the stone age, there will be a huge die-off. I can't think of a scenario for dropping it to the stone age which wouldn't involve killing lots of people, anyway, but if it did then most remaining people would die because they did not know how to survive, and because as technology goes lower the population density you can feed goes down. In the end, though, people will be left alive. From what I have read, North America had about 2 million inhabitants when Europeans first found the place. The combined population of the US & CAnada today is in the vicinity of 300 million. That is the sort of "die off" you would be talking about.

Now consider folks living in domes on the moon. There is no nature - nothing to hunt or fish, not roots & nuts & fruits & berries to gather. Hydoponic farms, etc... require chemical processing, which is gone. Food is not the real problem, though. The equipment that reprocesses the air cannot be operated or maintained. Everybody dies.

I do agree there should be degrees, much as you have proposed. It is much more difficult to put a dome in where the atmoshere is just the wrong gas than it is when you have to deal with all those other issues.

[This message has been edited by Barnacle Bill (edited 03 February 2001).]